Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
. and you look everybody is saying it, john boehner, mitch mcconnell peter king lindsay graham, on and on and on. all of these republicans coming out and saying we agree, you can't do it by spending cuts alone. you have got to raise revenues and we're on board, and we're willing to break the grover norquist pledge. these guys have totally recognized the american people agree with obama, and so therefore they are going to change their ways. here is my advise to all of you, all right. don't believe it. this is a con game. this is a shell game that the republicans are playing. let's listen to some of the voices. here for example is saxby channedless. it's valid now but times have changed significantly. and i care more about this country than i do about a 20-year old pledge. >> bill: oh, yeah. he is setting himself up there as oh, man, i love my country, more than i love grover norquist. peter king yesterday. >> i agree entirely, a pledge you signed 18 years ago is for that congress. if i were in congress in 1841 i would have signed the declaration of war agai
has changed, and the economic situation is different. >> so peter king is telling us, mike barnicle, not only is he going soft on taxes, he's going soft on japan. >> i know. >> it's not just peter king on the taxes. it's a big step, don't you think? >> it's a big step. >> grover. yeah, grover's taking a big hit since the election. there's no doubt about it. i think john, you'd verify this. number of republicans, i've talked to a couple of united states senators who said there's at least 10 to 12 republican senators who are willing to walk away from grover norquist on the tax pledge. >> it's breaking out all over. sanity is contagious. >> now, the question is, is the president going to stay where he is and go, you know what? we're going to do it my way or no other way? we're going to raise it to 90 -- to 39.6%. steve rattner had a great column yesterday. >> it's a must-read. >> you know there's more than one way to skin a cat, more than one way to raise over a trillion dollars in revenues. it doesn't just have to be the president's way. is the white house going to insist on the 39.6%
off your shoe. >> everybody who signed the pledge including peter king who tried to weasel out of it, shame on him as the new york sun said today. >> new york sun? >> understands that commitments last a little longer than two years or something. >> oh, you're comparing your stupid little pledge to his marriage to his wife. oh, i see. what? all right you're really priceless, grover, grover, grover, grover. ♪ >> yeah, he he's going off the deep end getting personal like that. i'm for getting rid of p.b.s. if it gets rid of grover. >> stephanie: kids, what's fun in one word? soda stream, right? >> yeah. >> stephanie: fun! wow! there was a lot of annoying kids in that commercial. it's a new way to enjoy soda made at home in less than 30 seconds. right? it took a lot longer than that to get to the park off the transit. >> fun? that's what they said at that german zoo. >> stephanie: stop it. [buzzer] >> stephanie: it's the ultimate holiday gift. seriously, everybody loves it, moms dads, kids, teenagers. >> even kids with chicken pox. >> stephanie: kids that climb on rocks. stop with the
the other saxby chambliss, lindsey graham, bob corker, peter king, they're willing to break the grover norquist pledge and consider new revenue. is this really anything new? >> no. all right. next question? first of all they're not saying anything new first of all. they're not saying we're willing to talk about rates -- >> bill: in fact they're saying they'll vote against rates -- getting rid of the bush tax cuts. >> this is not a change in policy at all. that's number one. number two these are -- senate republicans who don't have a lot of influence in this particular subject area. they're not the most -- they're not the biggest players. third, they're senate republicans. we need house republicans to change their minds. so i said this in my blog yesterday, this is not as significant as it seems and all of those who made such a big deal about it over the weekend are missing the key point. it is not a change in policy and two, look who it is. it is not that important. when i see some tea party switching and eric canto
nation. i certainly want to thank also chairman peter king also and, of course, my good friend, michael mccaul, chairman mccaul, for being one of the original co-sponsors, along with mr. farenthold. a new member from the bounceville area, mr. faleomavaega, who always worked in a bipartisan way. the jamie zapata, this 915, has received bipartisan support in may when it was first passed by the house. it was overwhelmingly supported by the house. both democrats and republicans. went over to the senate and certainly i want to thank, also, senator lieberman and senator collins for the support of this bill. senator lieberman was outstanding in making sure we move this as quickly as possible. we have a bill that does two things. first things, enhances border security. and number two is to flame this particular bill in honor of a brave individual that jamie zapata that has given up his life. i know some months ago both chairman mccaul and i had the opportunity to meet with the family, with the mother and father of this strong hero that we got to know in the service of the line of duty. as you k
of an update on the fiscal cliff and the progress that we saw. i have mentioned saxby chambliss and peter king, as well as lindsay gramm, putting distance between themselves and the pledge. with that kind of compromise coming from the republicans, where is the president willing to give? we have been asking over and over about the tax rates and whether he would, instead of increasing tax rates, perhaps settle for closing loopholes. could you tell us more about where the president stands on this? and what kind of confidence you can give the public that this will get done? >> let me start at the top by saying that some of the comments that you mentioned are welcome. they represent what we hope is a difference in tone and approach to these problems, and a recognition that a balanced approach to deficit reduction is the one that is most beneficial for our economy, protect the middle-class, strengthens its, creates levels of opportunity for those who aspire to the middle class to get there. i would also say that the president has made clear that he would not sign a bill that extends the bush era tax
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6